The Florida Panthers stunned the hockey world this offseason by securing Brad Marchand, Aaron Ekblad, and Sam Bennett to long-term deals—moves that many believed would be financially impossible under current salary cap restrictions. While the contracts signal a clear intention to maintain championship contention, one of them has sparked widespread controversy.
At the center of the debate is Brad Marchand, who signed a contract extension that would keep him under team control until age 43. Marchand, known for his gritty leadership and offensive consistency, is coming off a productive campaign—but the length of his deal is unprecedented for a player his age.
The structure of the contract has led to strong accusations of cap circumvention, a violation the NHL has vowed to crack down on. David Alter, analyst and NHL insider for The Hockey News,was among the first to publicly criticize the league’s approval of the deal, citing its similarity to other high-profile cases that were ultimately blocked or penalized.
Is the Marchand deal a violation of the CBA’s spirit?
“I still can’t believe the NHL allowed this deal to go through,” Alter shared on X (formerly Twitter). “Yes, it’s within the rules. But the Ilya Kovalchuk 15-year, $100 million deal was also within the rules until the NHL said enough was enough and didn’t allow it.”
Brad Marchand #63 of the Florida Panthers holds the Stanley Cup during the Florida Panthers 2025 Stanley Cup Victory Parade and Rally on June 22, 2025 on Fort Lauderdale Beach, Florida. (Photo by Eliot J. Schechter/Getty Images)
In Alter’s view, the Panthers are exploiting a legal gray area: extending Marchand’s term far beyond his expected playing years in order to reduce his annual cap hit. This tactic, often referred to as “front-loading,” has become controversial in recent NHL history—prompting several rule revisions over the past decade.
see also
Former NHL All-Star issues blunt warning about Florida after Brad Marchand, Aaron Ekblad, and Sam Bennett’s extensions
What troubles many insiders is the NHL’s stated intent to prevent such maneuvers. “It is kind of sketchy,” Alter continued. “I’d be surprised—or maybe I shouldn’t be—if the NHL allows it. This looks like pure cap circumvention… doesn’t look like anything is going to be done about it.”
Should the NHL step in and review the contract?
Marchand’s deal is legal under the current Collective Bargaining Agreement, but critics argue it undermines the cap system’s fairness. At 37 years old, Marchand would need to maintain NHL-level performance into his 40s to fulfill the contract’s full duration—a feat accomplished by only a handful of forwards in league history.
As Alter points out, if Marchand retires or is placed on long-term injured reserve in the latter years of the contract, the Panthers would avoid cap penalties while reaping the benefits of a lower cap hit in the earlier seasons. This loophole—though technically allowed—has drawn renewed concern about cap integrity.
Survey Did the Panthers go too far with Marchand’s extension?
Did the Panthers go too far with Marchand’s extension?
ALREADY VOTED 0 PEOPLE
Despite the backlash, the Panthers have not commented publicly. With the offseason still underway and league offices monitoring major transactions, it remains to be seen whether the NHL will investigate further or allow the contract to stand without challenge.
